Search results

Again thank you for quoting these studies by Roger Cicala. However, at no point does Roger ever state that in order to get meaningful improvements in image quality from a 150MP sensor that you have to get the lens to perform at a particular level at 200lp/mm. Nor should you be quoting Roger as...

Thank goodness someone posted this link to Roger Cicala's post. It strongly questions the dogma that "sensors are out-resolving lenses". The resolution limits of each format remain uncertain at this stage. It is possible to determine what the reasonable resolution limits of each format are, but...

I think it has finally dawned on Canon that Nikon isn't their main rival any more. As for Canon getting cheesed off at leaks, they can look to the Nikon example where there are no leaks, but also no internet buzz of anticipation over future products. Nikon killed off the leaks and may have...

So show us an example of a top notch Canon L lens that weighs 2.5-3kg and costs around $3500 USD?????? It exists in the same same unicorns and rainbows fairy world as this fantasy $3500 135mm f/1.4 lens.

I think the starry-eyed optimists need to start a GoFundMe page to collect deposits ($1000 perhaps) for the 135mm f/1.4 with a guaranteed maximum ceiling price of $3500 USD. If it is any more expensive the person who owns the page gets to pay out the difference.

My principle argument has always been that the best guide to the pricing of a hypothetical 135mm f/1.4 from Canon (assuming it has autofocus) is to look at the example of the great whites eg EF 200mm f/2.0, EF 300mm f/2.8, or 400mm f/2.8. Canon would be doing well to keep the weight of a 135mm...

The Sigma 150-600 is a consumer-grade zoom, designed to be cost-effective, and whatever it may weigh or whatever its front element size, it cannot be compared in its optical qualities, and hence price, with high-end great whites. In terms of its engineering-grade and hence pricing, an...

The manual focus Mitakon version of the 135mm f/1.4 costs $3000 USD. It is starry-eyed wishful thinking to believe that Canon would charge only $500 dollars more, especially for a version that also has autofocus, in addition to more state of the art optics. It is understandable that people want...

The same is going to be true across the board including with the 400mm f/2.8 as well as a hypothetical 135mm f/1.4.

The EF 200mm f/2 weighs about 2kg and costs about $5600. The EF 400mm f/2.8 weighs 3.8kg and costs $8000. The Canon 135mm f/1.4 optical formula looks like it uses extra aspherical elements to reduce the weight and size of the lens as with the latest optical formulae of the recently refreshed EF...

One more critical point. It is in Sony's vested self-interest to claim that a 35mm mount with APS-C dimensions presents no optical engineering limitations. It is in Canon's vested self-interest to claim that their time and effort in developing a new 35mm mirrorless mount with optimal dimensions...

Of course, Sony would claim this. Sony issued this denial only with respect to the particular concern that the FE mount would not be able to support ultra-wide apertures. That is NOT the criticism of an ASP-C dimension 35mm format mount that Canon has come up with. The Canon internal R&D...

Exactly. A Sony engineer gave a public talk in Japan in which he admitted that there was a heated debate within the company as to whether they should retro-convert their APS-C E mount into a 35mm format mount. That suggests that there were almost certainly dissenters amongst the Sony engineers...

The most important thing in this article was this statement: "Canon claims that the shorter back focus distance with a wider opening allows them to place larger elements closer to the sensor to achieve this. The fact that the rear element is a large aspheric with subwavelength coating, and that...

I love calling 35mm format, small format, and a subframe, crop format because it drives the "full frame" hyperbolists bonkers. Funny, we never used to call 35mm format, "full frame" in the film era. https://photonicshunkan.blogspot.com/2019/04/what-does-full-frame-mean.html

What Nokishita has actually written is 1億2百万 1億= 100M 2百万 = 2M 100M & 2M make 102M Babelfish gets it right. Try it. If you run it through Google translator, it wrongly translates it as 120M. Oddly if you run 2百万 through Google it says 2M but as part of 1億2百万, it gets it wrong. BTW 120M would be...

I am going to stick my neck out and say it is going to be a digital version of the 35mm format EOS-1N RS camera: This was the last pellicle mirror camera that Canon made. It finished production around 2002. Canon have a tradition of making pellicle mirror cameras eg the Pellix line, going...

For this sort of money Zeiss better make it the best money can buy (at least in 35mm format lenses). I hope Lens Rental doesn't find that the MTF plots of the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 are already better than those of the Otus 1.4/100. If so then the Otus is dead on arrival. Sadly, there is good reason...

Count me in as a sceptic about this latest piece of gossip (it doesn't even deserve to be called a rumour). For a start, Canon has no other top of the line APS-C system (system meaning not only bodies but lenses as well) for shooting sports and wildlife. The EOS-M system is certainly in no...

Since we are all in wild speculation mode, I might as well throw my 5 yen worth in too. Ages ago, Egami found a Canon patent for a SLT system. Canon wouldn't call it that, they would call it a pellicle mirror camera. I do wonder if there are limitations to how fast you can get a reflex mirror...